China's anti-satellite weapon a "trump card" against US

[JohnyD]

The US satellites that empower GPS system must have some kind its own defence system. This ASAT might be new thing to China and many countries in the world but not for US and SU. I guess, US is just playing a mind game and gauging the level expertise that Chinese can achieve or think about.

In the worst case scenario in future, if Chinese manage to take down even a single US satellite, China will become the past in future!

 

[gambit]

Each GPS satellite can be respositioned WITHOUT affecting its intended purpose. The ASAT attacker's sensory/guidance methods and systems are at questions here.

 

[jhungary]

the credibility of your media，aka，propaganda，is not worth the roll of papers you find beside the loo in your bathroom。

The world thought Iraq had weapons of mass destruction because your media were true to the spirit of reporting，i.e. making up stories if so doing is in America's national interests，while trying to be “objective” when “truth” matters little。

You are deluded if you think your propaganda，often black，can fool people other than some of your allies。

LoL i can say the same thing to you, but with US or American replaced by China, so why bother giving some non-substanced post? Oh yes, you need your 50 cents....

Well, I have already exposed you to other members. If you are ashamed of your true nationality that's your business. I just don't want other members who do not speak good English to be fooled. That's already done.

To you my friend, i have finally uploaded a video of me (behind the camera ) talking about this. Bear in mind i made this video 2 am and spend another 38 minutes to upload. My voice is a bit tired as you can hear from the video

Consider this is my last reply on you regarding this topic, if you have another question about my origin and/or whether where i was born and where was i educated, you can take it up my arse. I am more tha nhappy to answer you regarding Chinese Anti-Satellite Missile if you are willing to listen.

saying Iraq possess WMD is more like reporting NEWS or creating NEWS?

Our media did not create a story here, that's our government, that is, if it is the case, our media, unlike yours, is NOT controlled by the government.

Unfortunately, this 'janitor' has far more critical thinking skills than you do. The kill vehicle must have a guidance method. Even if the kill vehicle is explosive instead of kinetic kill via collision, the sensory/guidance system must still be as sophisticated as the GPS satellite itself because essentially the ASAT attacker is -- IS -- a satellite. So while the ASAT attacker itself may be physically smaller than the target, it must still conform to real -- not 'Chinese physics' -- regarding booster capability in order to get to that excess of 20,000 km altitude.

Further, the latest GPS satellite is actually not that large. The early versions were barely 3 meters in diameter and the later version is slightly larger than 3 meters. The old American ASM-135 which was launched from an F-15 has diameter of .5 meter and it was primitive as far as sensory/guidance system goes. Do YOU have access to China's current ASAT experiment vehicles and future deployed designs?

It does not take much to do some basic search on publicly available information...

Recent US and Chinese Antisatellite Activities

The KT-1 was designed for sub-orbital targets and already it was 20 times the launch mass of the American SM-3. How much larger would a GPS satellite altitude capable ASAT attacker must be and how mobile can it really be?

If there is such a thing as 'high Chinese IQ', the Chinese crowd here must be statistical outliars -- from the low end.

And yes, I meant outliars instead of outliers.

Dude, wh ybother answering this guy, you know for a fact that your answer will go down in drain and become unappreicated. You dig your head in the books and try to come up with an answer that make sense, and they use their "Logic" which worth virtually nothing to counter your point, with or without any meaning.

Not like i haven't tried with these troll, dig up my knowledge for hours on in and i got a reply was f'you and Our Chinese technology/Military/People can do whatever the heck they want and destroy [INSERT YOUR COUTNRY HERE]. Got bored of these kind of agrument already, i wonder why you still answer this guy with substance.

On topic.

No one in the world doubted Chinese are doing this kind of technology, the fact to the matter is, is this a trump card? No.

Anyone can do this, and anyone can launch satellite. Without going in deep in to much of a technology, you can keep building your missile, we can keep building our satellite. How it turn out is how many you can shoot down using your missile. Like the game we play in battle of atlantic. The only different is, we only need 1 or 2 satellite in the sky and everything will maintain status quo, we can't do that in the battle of atlantic.

It's not like "oh you now have way to destroy our satellite, we should not put any more in the space." This thought is stupid. Why nobody ever see it??

 

[j20blackdragon]

We know China's launch facilities. B-2s can take them out and that trump card is toilet paper.

A couple of things to consider:

1. The bombs and missiles launched by the B-2 are easily thrown off course by GPS jammers. The B-2 doesn't carry the AGM-88 HARM so please don't even bother mentioning that.

2. A B-2 opening its bomb bays at high altitude to drop SDB pretty much loses its stealth. Kiss the B-2 (and the pilots inside) goodbye.

3. You haven't proven that the Chinese ASAT isn't mobile. Just because it's big doesn't mean it's not mobile.

4. How do you know the ASAT isn't launched from a number of hidden silos?

 

[Protocol man]

A couple of things to consider:

1. The bombs and missiles launched by the B-2 are easily thrown off course by GPS jammers. The B-2 doesn't carry the AGM-88 HARM so please don't even bother mentioning that.

2. A B-2 opening its bomb bays at high altitude to drop SDB pretty much loses its stealth. Kiss the B-2 (and the pilots inside) goodbye.

3. You haven't proven that the Chinese ASAT isn't mobile. Just because it's big doesn't mean it's not mobile.

4. How do you know the ASAT isn't launched from a number of hidden silos?

B-2 hasn't proven sh*t. It hasn't proven it can penetrate Chinese air defences and I'm willing to bet it can't and won't. The F-117 got shot down in Serbia which proves these 'stealth' aircraft are just media hype that only clueless white worshipping Indians cling onto.

 

[haidian]

Serbian newspaper's title on downed US "stealth fighter bomber",Sorry, we didn't know you were invisible

 

[Knight of Tang]

That's a good one

Serbian newspaper's title on downed US "stealth fighter bomber",Sorry, we didn't know you were invisible

 

[gambit]

A couple of things to consider:

1. The bombs and missiles launched by the B-2 are easily thrown off course by GPS jammers. The B-2 doesn't carry the AGM-88 HARM so please don't even bother mentioning that.

The Serbian airfield attack was after Desert Storm where GPS jammers were used by the Iraqis.

2. A B-2 opening its bomb bays at high altitude to drop SDB pretty much loses its stealth. Kiss the B-2 (and the pilots inside) goodbye.

The bomb bay doors of today's bombers are not of WW II's era where the doors are opened for minutes prior to drop. You have been watching too many B-rated Chinese propaganda movies. And even if by some remote chance that a B-2 is detected via those opened bomb bay doors, that detection will be so brief that it will not provide radar lock.

3. You haven't proven that the Chinese ASAT isn't mobile. Just because it's big doesn't mean it's not mobile.

I can say the Space Shuttle on the ground is mobile as well.

4. How do you know the ASAT isn't launched from a number of hidden silos?

Then it is not mobile. There are always telltale signs of hidden silos. But the reality is that even if they are launched from hidden silos, once airborned they will be detected. GPS satellites can be repositioned without affecting their operations and since the interceptor is essentially a satellite itself and must achieve the same orbit as the target, the interceptor's smaller size mean limited maneuvering fuel, if maneuvering capability is designed. The GPS satellite have high odds of evasion. On the other hand, China's Beidou satellites are vulnerable to the US X-37B, of which no one know its true role and capabilities.

B-2 hasn't proven sh*t. It hasn't proven it can penetrate Chinese air defences and I'm willing to bet it can't and won't. The F-117 got shot down in Serbia which proves these 'stealth' aircraft are just media hype that only clueless white worshipping Indians cling onto.

You can bet anything you want. Unfortunately for your drivel here, your military leadership is not wiling to bet the entire nation.

 

[gambit]

Serbian newspaper's title on downed US "stealth fighter bomber",Sorry, we didn't know you were invisible

Pleeeeeease...

Weapons - F-117a Stealth | The Gulf War | FRONTLINE | PBS

As a coalitions workhorse, the F-117A logged nearly 1,300 combat sorties while flying 6,905 combat flying hours.

Out of the entire air campaign, one F-16 and one F-117 lost. That is NOT an air defense combat record to boast about at the bar.

Here is what Dani said about that single lucky shot...

USATODAY.com - Serb discusses 1999 downing of stealth

It involved "electromagnetic waves," was all that Dani — who now owns a small bakery in this sleepy village just north of Belgrade — would divulge.

Woooo...

I have no idea that radar detection involve 'electromagnetic waves'. Is this what China learned from the Serbs? That to shoot down 'stealth', China would have to use 'electromagnetic waves'?

 

[KingMamba]

@jhungary I do not see why you had to post that video, you do not have to prove anything to that guy.

 

[Audio]

Here is what Dani said about that single lucky shot...

USATODAY.com - Serb discusses 1999 downing of stealth

Woooo...

I have no idea that radar detection involve 'electromagnetic waves'. Is this what China learned from the Serbs? That to shoot down 'stealth', China would have to use 'electromagnetic waves'?

He said they set the wavelenghts so long that they exceeded the threshold level of dispersion on the F-117. ie. they were longer wavelenghts then what the F-117 was designed to disperse. + flying same path every night.

 

[gambit]

He said they set the wavelenghts so long that they exceeded the threshold level of dispersion on the F-117. ie. they were longer wavelenghts then what the F-117 was designed to disperse. + flying same path every night.

Those effects are:

http://www.argospress.com/Resources/radar/radarcrossectio.htmv

- Raleigh region. If the target is a lot smaller than the wavelength of the radar system, the target is said to be in the Raleigh region. If the target is in the Raleigh region, the radar cross section of the target tends to be smaller than the target's physical size.

- Resonance region. If the target is of similar dimension to that of the wavelength, the target is said to be in the resonance region. In the resonance region, the radar cross section of the target may vary a great deal but tends to be larger than the physical size of the target.

- Optical region. The optical region occurs when the target is much larger than the operating wavelength of the radar. This is quite often the case with operational radar systems whose wavelengths are normally in the order of centimetres in length. When operating in this region, the radar cross section of the target is similar to its physical size.

What Dani said works in theory, but in application it is problematic for many reasons involving target resolutions:

- Speed
- Altitude
- Heading
- Aspect angle

The longer the operating frequency, the coarser those resolutions and when the relationship between detection freq and target approaches the meters length and greater, it is so coarse that it is next to worthless for missile targeting. Nothing more than for general direction finding.

The F-117 pilot, Lt. Col. Dale Zelko, recalled he had to dodge at least three missiles. That mean Zoltan Dani got at best a general direction/heading of an F-117 flight and did the classic 'spray and pray' tactic. He got lucky.

 

[j20blackdragon]

The Serbian airfield attack was after Desert Storm where GPS jammers were used by the Iraqis.

Perhaps an even more recent example would be the downing of the RQ-170. The RQ-170 stealth UAV is arguably much more sophisticated than the average smart bomb, and yet Iran got it to crash land. How did they do it?

The bomb bay doors of today's bombers are not of WW II's era where the doors are opened for minutes prior to drop. You have been watching too many B-rated Chinese propaganda movies. And even if by some remote chance that a B-2 is detected via those opened bomb bay doors, that detection will be so brief that it will not provide radar lock.

I agree, it wouldn't be enough for a radar lock. But it's enough information for China to vector fighter aircraft to the B-2's general location. The B-2 remains a subsonic aircraft. It isn't going anywhere fast.

I can say the Space Shuttle on the ground is mobile as well.

So is the DF-31 and DF-41. China has demonstrated time and time again that it likes to build road-mobile missiles. Is this time any different?

Then it is not mobile. There are always telltale signs of hidden silos.

The great thing about silos is that you can also build fake silos.

But the reality is that even if they are launched from hidden silos, once airborned they will be detected. GPS satellites can be repositioned without affecting their operations and since the interceptor is essentially a satellite itself and must achieve the same orbit as the target, the interceptor's smaller size mean limited maneuvering fuel, if maneuvering capability is designed. The GPS satellite have high odds of evasion. On the other hand, China's Beidou satellites are vulnerable to the US X-37B, of which no one know its true role and capabilities.

Isn't this kinda like saying the much larger B-52 with more fuel can outmaneuver the much smaller F-16?

The bottom line is that the ASAT kill vehicle is a purpose-built weapon that was designed to maneuver itself into another satellite. If it was designed to explode, it will also have a blast radius.

 

[gambit]

Perhaps an even more recent example would be the downing of the RQ-170. The RQ-170 stealth UAV is arguably much more sophisticated than the average smart bomb, and yet Iran got it to crash land. How did they do it?

Downing? What proof do you have that it was a shot down? Because the Iranians say so?

I agree, it wouldn't be enough for a radar lock. But it's enough information for China to vector fighter aircraft to the B-2's general location. The B-2 remains a subsonic aircraft. It isn't going anywhere fast.

You have no idea how vast is the sky, do you? You have no idea even at subsonic, how much area an aircraft can be, especially when it just delivered its bombs and hit the proverbial deck, do you? Have you even been airborned at all?

So is the DF-31 and DF-41. China has demonstrated time and time again that it likes to build road-mobile missiles. Is this time any different?

Can either one achieve the same orbit altitude as the GPS satellites?

The great thing about silos is that you can also build fake silos.

Sure. But there are still signs to indicate whether a silo is a decoy or the real thing. Try infrared for one.

Isn't this kinda like saying the much larger B-52 with more fuel can outmaneuver the much smaller F-16?

The bottom line is that the ASAT kill vehicle is a purpose-built weapon that was designed to maneuver itself into another satellite. If it was designed to explode, it will also have a blast radius.

If there is a god for aviation, he must be laughing. In space, there is no aerodynamic drag because there is no air, right?

You have been watching too man B-rated sci-fi movies. Do you know how long it takes for the Space Shuttle to achieve co-orbit with the ISS? Do you know how long it takes for the Space Shuttle to maneuver for docking? It does not matter if the mass is smaller, the interceptor must still achieve co-orbit with the target before attempting to rendezvous/collide with it. Try hours. In that time, the GPS satellite can execute simple maneuvers in those same hours to slightly change orbit.

http://www.ucsusa.org/nuclear_weapo...olicy_issues/a-history-of-anti-satellite.html

1960s–1970s: Co-Orbital ASAT Weapons and U.S.-Soviet Bilateral Agreements
Russia's only dedicated ASAT system used a co-orbital strategy, in which a weapon armed with conventional explosives is launched into the same orbit as the target satellite and moves near enough to destroy it. The 1,400-kilogram Russian Co-Orbital ASAT weapon, for example, was designed to approach a satellite within one or two orbits (1.5 - 3 hours), then detonate an explosive that would damage the target with shrapnel. After conducting a series of seven tests from 1963–1971—including five interceptor detonations—the Soviet Union declared the system operational in 1973.

 

[j20blackdragon]

Downing? What proof do you have that it was a shot down? Because the Iranians say so?

Actually, no one said it was shot down. But it is down. How did Iran do it?

You have no idea how vast is the sky, do you? You have no idea even at subsonic, how much area an aircraft can be, especially when it just delivered its bombs and hit the proverbial deck, do you? Have you even been airborned at all?

If that's your argument, I'll go with it.

In that case, a group of J-20s and J-31s should be able to attack an American aircraft carrier and escape with no problem at all. The sky is vast isn't it?

Can either one achieve the same orbit altitude as the GPS satellites?

No one said they could. I simply used the DF-31 and DF-41 as examples of Chinese road-mobile missiles. But can you give me a good reason why the ASAT can't be road-mobile?

Sure. But there are still signs to indicate whether a silo is a decoy or the real thing. Try infrared for one.

Good luck hitting silos (some real some fake) spread all across China with just 20 subsonic B-2s.

You have been watching too man B-rated sci-fi movies. Do you know how long it takes for the Space Shuttle to achieve co-orbit with the ISS? Do you know how long it takes for the Space Shuttle to maneuver for docking?

We're not docking. We're sending a kill vehicle to collide with/explode within the vicinity of the GPS satellite.